Resting-state functional connectivity abnormalities in patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder and their healthy first-degree relatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a common, heritable neuropsychiatric disorder, hypothetically underpinned by dysfunction of brain cortical-striatal-thalamic-cortical (CSTC) circuits; however, the extent of brain functional abnormalities in individuals with OCD is unclear, and the genetic basis of this disorder is poorly understood. We determined the whole brain functional connectivity patterns in patients with OCD and their healthy first-degree relatives. METHODS: We used resting-state fMRI to measure functional connectivity strength in patients with OCD, their healthy first-degree relatives and healthy controls. Whole brain functional networks were constructed by measuring the temporal correlations of all brain voxel pairs and further analyzed using a graph theory approach. RESULTS: We enrolled 39 patients with OCD, 20 healthy first-degree relatives and 39 healthy controls in our study. Compared with healthy controls, patients with OCD showed increased functional connectivity primarily within the CSTC circuits and decreased functional connectivity in the occipital cortex, temporal cortex and cerebellum. Moreover, patients with OCD and their first-degree relatives exhibited overlapping increased functional connectivity strength in the bilateral caudate nucleus, left orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and left middle temporal gyrus. LIMITATIONS: Potential confounding factors, such as medication use, heterogeneity in symptom clusters and comorbid disorders, may have impacted our findings. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary results suggest that patients with OCD have abnormal resting-state functional connectivity that is not limited to CSTC circuits and involves abnormalities in additional large-scale brain systems, especially the limbic system. Moreover, resting-state functional connectivity strength abnormalities in the left OFC, bilateral caudate nucleus and left middle temporal gyrus may be neuroimaging endophenotypes for OCD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".